(Economic Observation) Is the result of refusing to be compensated for 18,000 yuan for overtime work reasonable?

  China News Service, Beijing, May 3 (Wang Qingkai) During the "May Day" holiday, many people are still working, and some are "forced to work overtime." At this time, a piece of news caught people's attention.

  According to media reports, two employees in Yangzhou City, Jiangsu Province, who refused to work overtime, caused the company to lose 120,000 yuan (RMB, the same below) and were awarded a compensation of 18,000 yuan. According to the judge, according to the Labor Law of the People's Republic of China (hereinafter referred to as the "Labor Law"), if an enterprise encounters an emergency production task and requires the worker to work overtime, the worker must obey.

  As soon as this matter was reported, it quickly aroused public opinion. "'996' hasn't seen any punishment yet, refusing to work overtime will be punished first!" "If overtime is not paid, no one manages it, and it's illegal to refuse to work overtime?"

  But some people think: "It's okay to refuse to work overtime, but you want to threaten the company and cause losses. Employees should compensate."

  Qu Senbin, president of the People ’s Court of Hanjiang Court High-tech Zone in Yangzhou City, who is responsible for hearing the case, said that according to the relevant provisions of the Labor Law, workers and employers have a two-way choice. Although workers have the right to refuse to work overtime, enterprises are in emergency. For production tasks, when workers are required to work overtime, workers must obey.

  "Enterprises can arrange for workers to work overtime and require workers to work overtime. In this case, workers cannot refuse to work overtime. Two employees know that the task is urgent, but they deliberately refuse to work overtime, and should bear corresponding responsibility for the losses caused by the enterprise. "Qu Senbin said.

  Gu Xiaoming, a lawyer from Beijing Jingshi Law Firm, believes that under normal circumstances, the company does not have the power to force employees to work overtime. However, in the event of a special emergency, the company requires employees to work overtime. The employees do need to cooperate to prevent losses. Otherwise, in the case of the company's proof, the employees may be liable for partial compensation.

  However, Wang Tianyu, an associate researcher at the Institute of Law of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences and an expert in labor law, holds a different view.

  "The court's judgment is debatable." Wang Tianyu told a reporter from China News Service that the "Labor Law" requires employers to extend working hours after consultation with trade unions and laborers due to production and operation needs, generally not exceeding one hour per day; because If the working hours need to be extended for special reasons, the extended working hours shall not exceed three hours per day under the condition of protecting the health of workers, but shall not exceed thirty-six hours per month.

  Wang Tianyu believes that there is a necessary condition for overtime work here, "the employer needs to negotiate with the trade union and laborers because of production and operation." In this case, employees do not want to work overtime, which is tantamount to failure to negotiate, and companies do not have the right to force workers to work overtime.

  Article 31 of the Labor Law also clearly stipulates that the employer should strictly implement the labor quota standards, and may not force or disguise laborers to work overtime in disguised form.

  From an enterprise perspective, Wang Tianyu believes that the difference between labor relations and partnerships needs to be clarified. Different from the partnership relationship, the labor relationship is that the laborer does not bear the business risk of the enterprise, the enterprise has the right to organize manpower, and also bears the risk of organizing manpower. "Enterprises have the right to organize manpower, so whether they benefit or not, this is something that companies need to bear."

  In other words, the two employees in this case have the right to refuse overtime work, and the company can organize other manpower to carry out emergency production tasks. The losses caused thereby shall not be borne by the workers. "Workers refuse to work overtime in accordance with the law and should not bear joint losses. This kind of judgment is absurd."

  "If the enterprise benefits from completing the order, can the enterprise allocate 25% of the profit to overtime employees?" Wang Tianyu asked inversely, if the worker refuses to work within the normal working hours, the enterprise can fine or dismiss him in serious violation of regulations. However, over time, the worker can refuse to work overtime, and the loss should not be borne by the worker.

  Wang Tianyu believes that overtime in the Chinese workplace has become the norm, but companies regard it as the norm, and judges should not consider it justified. The overtime provisions of the "Labor Law" for "special reasons" should not be abused out of context. The court's judgment must comply with the procedural requirements, and the legal provisions should be fully understood, rather than "key wording".

  Even if the employees agree to work overtime after consultation, Gu Xiaoming believes that if workers are scheduled to work longer hours on working days, they must pay no less than 150% of their wages; if overtime cannot be arranged on weekends, they must pay no less than 200% of their wages. Wage remuneration, if you can arrange compensatory leave, you do not need to pay double wages; if the "Spring Festival", "May Day", "Eleven", "Mid-Autumn Festival" and other legal holidays arrange for workers to work overtime, no matter whether they are adjusted or not, they must pay no less than 300 % Remuneration. (Finish)